Printing photos at home

Hey all! Just need some advise/recommendation on printing wedding photos at home.

1. Would it be economical wise decision to buy a photo printer instead of printing photographs somewhere else and if so, how many images would I have to print to break even?

2. What features/parameters would I need to look out for when buying a printer? What would you guys recommend?

Thanks!

The simple answer to your first question is no. Cost is generally not a good reason to do the printing yourself. I good lab is usually as cost effective for most photographers as making quality prints yourself. The main cost to consider is the cost of the ink and the paper.

I like Canon Pro 100 printers. Here in the States, there are often deals on this printer where you can buy it for as low as nothing after the rebate. But, these deals are probably different in GB, so I really can't advise you what is a good deal for your country.

I'm just a hobbyist, for me I tried printing at home years ago & got frustrated with blocked heads etc...

Printers have come a long way since then & if I were to buy one it would be the Canon Imageprograf Pro 1000...but the consumables will kill me...& maybe the wife too...lol

Printing from a quality online vendor saves you a hardware outlay & of course consumables...BUT it takes time to turnaround & what if the print comes back with the colours off as you edited in post to your screen rather than profiling - costs you twice & twice the lead time...

Only you can make the final decision...there's clearly pros & cons to each...as for cost to print from an inkjet take a look HERE they show a few albeit in USD pricing.

domas wrote in post #18283514
Hey all! Just need some advise/recommendation on printing wedding photos at home.

1. Would it be economical wise decision to buy a photo printer instead of printing photographs somewhere else and if so, how many images would I have to print to break even?

2. What features/parameters would I need to look out for when buying a printer? What would you guys recommend?

Thanks!

Where printing yourself comes into its own is when doing special one off enlargements. A single print say in A3+ size on a good photo printer like an Epson Sure color 600 or 800 will more than likely beat most Pro lab printers in cost( and more often than not quality also) depending on what printer they use and what you have inhouse . Anymore than a couple of prints required and Pro Labs enlargements get cheaper as more prints done so after a couple of enlargements the Lab will be better

A happy medium Ive found is have a photo quality printer inhouse( I have a Epson Sure Color p600) for either proofing or one off enlargements( up to A3+ on my printer ) and then if more than a couple of prints are required I send off to the lab. Pretty easy to work out cutoff point also ....just get the labs price /quant info and compare against your own cost. There are rough per print costings availible on the web for all of the main printers which takes into acct inks paper, cost of printer etc etc

Nogo wrote in post #18283531
The simple answer to your first question is no. Cost is generally not a good reason to do the printing yourself. I good lab is usually as cost effective for most photographers as making quality prints yourself. The main cost to consider is the cost of the ink and the paper.

I like Canon Pro 100 printers. Here in the States, there are often deals on this printer where you can buy it for as low as nothing after the rebate. But, these deals are probably different in GB, so I really can't advise you what is a good deal for your country.

Pro 100 here in the UK is about the same price in Pounds Sterling, as the US RRP. About £375 or so if memory serves. The real issue is that there are ABSOLUTELY NO REBATE DEALS on this printer from Canon UK/EU. Add to that it is almost impossible to get the sorts of deals on OEM ink and Canon papers, not to mention that Red River papers must actually be made from unobtainium, not wood/cotton fibers, since there is no UK importer, and Red River will not ship to the UK or EU, means that we pay through the nose for DIY printing here. About the only glimmer of niceness are Permajet, who have an reasonable range of cost effective papers. They will even make you a custom ICC profile for your printer/ink combination, and do it for free if you are using their papers. They also have a range of third party inks, including a constant flow system.

Since the Pro 100 and the other printers in that series are only A3+ you are still relatively limited on size. Unless you are going to spring for a decent wide carriage printer, which seem to start at about £2K you are still going to have to send you for the larger stuff.

What I will now do is recommend that lab that I usually use, they are based in Manchester and IIRC Stockport. It's called DS Colour Labs, and the work they produce is absolutely outstanding. What is even better is the pricing. Apart from the odd A4 or 10×8 that I print on my Canon MG5150 multifunction, I print nothing less that 16×12. Prints in that size from DS Colour are only £1.20 each INCLUDING VAT, printed on Fuji Crystal Archive papers using Fuji Frontier 7000 machines. Apart from peak times for normal C-Type colour prints if you upload by 1PM (13:00) they will print and ship the same day! I always just use the basic Royal Mail First Class delivery option for my prints, £4.50 last time. The great thing is that although they say it's a two to three day untracked service, I have yet to not have the prints with me the day, even if it is a Saturday. Being on good terms with your postman in this situation can also help. Oh and Fuji Pearl (metallic effect) papers are just WOW. I used to think Cibachrome prints were special, but the pearl is the best I have ever seen.

They do the full range of professional services, including albums etc. If you are going to the Photography show at the NEC on 18-21 March this year, they will be exhibiting all of their stuff. I really cannot reccomand them highly enough, and no I have no affliation with them, other than being a very satisfied customer. Several other POTN member use them, one I know uses them for his club comp prints, and IIRC regularly wins prizes.

I will also mention another lab I use, although mostly for just a few special options, since price wise they are at the opposite end of the spectrum, that is Whitewall. Although they offer a full range of products, and the quality is somehow even better than DSCL, I just use them for my top quality black and white printing needs. They us a Lightjet digital exposure system with traditional Ilford black and white papers. My favorite is the Baryta Fiber Based option, however a straight 16×12 is £33.95 while if you add an additional 2" border as I like, the price rises to £45.95! Then you have the £10 courier delivery on top of that. It also takes about 10 days of lab time to do the job fully and correctly. They also offer the more normal RC papers, at a more reasonable price, £16.95 for the 16×12 and about £23 if you have the big border, but again the £10 for delivery, lab time for the RC is about a week. Whitewall are a German company, the lab is in/near Berlin, however the UK (and US) website is in English, and they charge on a UK bank in Sterling. They now have a branch in the US too for our cousins over the pond.

I have had a print on both papers, different images on each, and I simply cannot find adequate words to describe the results. If black and white really matters to you, you won't find anything better. The first one I had done on the RC paper had a very small light grey mark on the white border, I think from a roller somewhere in the system. Anyway I took a photo of the offending mark and emailed them about it. Within five minutes I had had a reply from customer services for apologising for the failure of the QC team to spot it, and saying don't worry we have sent the reprint job already. The thing being that when mounted and framed, the mount would hide the mark anyway. So although only a relativly minor issue it was sorted out by them with no fuss or bother. They should also be at the NEC show next month.

Alan

^ ^ What BigAl007 said! Plus https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1137968

And next time, here's a question, "DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT HELP IF YOU TOLD US WHERE YOU LIVE?"
Even your website gives no clue that I could find.

PhotosGuy wrote in post #18283974
^ ^ What BigAl007 said! Plus https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1137968

And next time, here's a question, "DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT HELP IF YOU TOLD US WHERE YOU LIVE?"
Even your website gives no clue that I could find.

There is a little clue in his Sig link, since it mentions Wedding Photog in Leeds. Although thanks to the former British Empire there are towns and cities all over the world that share a name with a village, town or city here in the UK. Sometimes many of them. For example, London (lots), Newcastle (several IIRC, including Australia and South Africa), Boston, York (OK the big one is New), Dallas (A little village in the Scottish Highlands, as well as some place in Texas), Cambridge (ours and the US one both home to prestigious universities), etc. etc. Oddly I don't recall any other places called Leeds, although I'm sure someone will now find at least one to put me right, and probably a dozen or so of them. Still I thought it was enough of a hint to be very UK centric in my post.

Frank I think it would be REALLY GOOD if everyone set at least their country, if not a more specific location. I know of one shooting related forum based here in the UK that requires the member to have filled in the location information with at a minimum the actual town where they live, before they can access the buy/sell area. They also have a minimum post requirement too. This is to stop people simply signing up in order to list gear for sale. It does help weed out the scammers too.

Alan

PhotosGuy wrote in post #18283974
And next time, here's a question, "DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT HELP IF YOU TOLD US WHERE YOU LIVE?"
Even your website gives no clue that I could find.

Many people here at POTN think that the location field is a good place to make a funny remark instead of giving a location.

Archibald wrote in post #18284015
Many people here at POTN think that the location field is a good place to make a funny remark instead of giving a location.

Well I did use the old version of the village name in mine, for it's small comedic content, beloved of kids who have just started school, and suddenly realise what it means when applied to the modern usage and so giggle uncontrollably about it.

Actually just mentioning the village name is probably enough for someone to be able to come to the village armed with the info available about me on POTN, and actually find me, without the need to look me up on the electoral roll. I know some people suggest not adding info to the location field for security reasons, but in general I don't think it really matters. Even 35 years ago if you knew someone's name, and the town they lived in it was not really that hard to find them, although you did have to go to the town hall or public library in person to inspect things like the aforementioned electoral roll in hard copy. While now you can probably do it a little faster and from the comfort of your own home.

Alan

domas wrote in post #18283514
Hey all! Just need some advise/recommendation on printing wedding photos at home.

1. Would it be economical wise decision to buy a photo printer instead of printing photographs somewhere else and if so, how many images would I have to print to break even?

2. What features/parameters would I need to look out for when buying a printer? What would you guys recommend?

Thanks!

Really depends on how many prints you would be printing and how large to print.

I have both a 24" and 44" printer at home and print sizes from around 16x24 up to 40"x60". My printing costs are roughly 1/5 the cost of getting the print done by a professional lab. For example a 24"x36" canvas print would cost me roughly $12 at home whereas if I were to use a professional lab, that cost would be $95.

Of course this does not take into account your time printing...which is really not much as you still have to do the post processing on the image if you farm out the printing.

With it being in house, it is not only cheaper, but you have a much quicker turn around time and you are in total control of the quality of the print. It really does not take many prints to recoup the cost of a printer. I've purchased my printers used for $1,000 and $1,500 and I've easy made up those costs in prints.

I've been using HP Z3100 printers as they are the most trouble free printers that don't require constant use. I'd stay away from Epson printers unless you use them often as they have a nasty tendency to close the nozzles. The Canon printers appear to be much better than Epson at clogging.

So you can run the numbers and decide if printing your own is economically doable...but there is nothing like watching a print come off the printer...

Thanks a lot for your thoughts! I have come to conclusion that I will probably will not bother with home printing. Cheers!

To me, the dangling question would be, what do you want as prints, and what do you want to do with them?

My first prints that I framed and hung were done through a lab, that was OK.

But I ended up with three "home" printers, one that did great photo prints, at letter-size, so it was OK for small sizes up to 8x10 photos, which is fine for at-home "coffee table use"...

However, my other two printers were for 13"x19" paper. those were my "display" prints. I printed in two common sizes, 12x 16 and 12x18. These sizes were to "match" the aspect ratios of the images from cameras that I had used. Because my printers did a great job of printing photos, I settled on a routine of getting frames to match those two sizes, and then hanging them so that the walls around my home were well-covered!

As such, visitors enjoyed browsing through my decor. Also, family members collected some prints and have hung them to decorate their own homes. It's nice visiting and seeing my work hanging!

All that being said, first, I've not resorted to outside printers to get prints of a size that I'd tend to frame and hang, it seems like the expense of a pro lab could be prohibitive. However, there are outlets nearby, Costco and some others, So it would be worth looking at, since the costs of home printing are definitely impacted by paper costs as well as ink supplies.

but another point is that I have never printed professionally for clients. Another is that I've never explored something like big prints for an art gallery. I've actually had people who have encouraged me to look at that, and I've been in "venues" where folks have hung nice big prints and sold them to people who have been ready and willing to pay! Gosh, standing there and watching that happen, and I've wondered if I should move in that new direction!

So, like I implied, it is needed for you to decide for yourself where you want to go with the whole task/field of prints! If you have a professional endeavor in mind, well, I'd probably advise lining up a professional print service! If you are just looking for home decor (as well as coffee table "stuff", well, It would still help to explore providers, doing multiple test runs. But then, there is a nice aspect of home printing, assuming you have a good-quality photo printer, you have the reward of seeing your own work "on display", not just your photography work, but also it can be cool to "show off" what you have created as prints, again assuming good gear and also the practice and skill to produce good quality prints!

Printing at home is time consuming, wasteful if you are not good at color balancing, and frustrating when the nozzles plug. I have an HP color printer bought years ago. It worked fine, but plugged repeatedly after periods when not in use. I spent time screwing around soaking the cartridges and with HP and third-party inks, but finally gave up. I unplugged it (that was years ago already) and it hasn't been used since. Most likely it will end up in the e-garbage.

Archibald wrote in post #18285676
Printing at home is time consuming, wasteful if you are not good at color balancing, and frustrating when the nozzles plug. I have an HP color printer bought years ago. It worked fine, but plugged repeatedly after periods when not in use. I spent time screwing around soaking the cartridges and with HP and third-party inks, but finally gave up. I unplugged it (that was years ago already) and it hasn't been used since. Most likely it will end up in the e-garbage.

I keep hearing about plugged nozzles. I've been printing with Epson printers for years. Right now I've using an R2400 and a 3800 Pro. I never turn them off. I've never had a clogged print head. That's 15 years of printing.

Archibald wrote in post #18285676
Printing at home is time consuming, wasteful if you are not good at color balancing, and frustrating when the nozzles plug. I have an HP color printer bought years ago. It worked fine, but plugged repeatedly after periods when not in use. I spent time screwing around soaking the cartridges and with HP and third-party inks, but finally gave up. I unplugged it (that was years ago already) and it hasn't been used since. Most likely it will end up in the e-garbage.

Depends on what printer you buy. Yes...the consumer printers are a hassle to use, but you get what you pay for like the difference between an 18-55 kit lens and a 24-70L. What do you expect?

As far as colour management goes...don't think it goes away if you don't print at home. If you send out your images for printing you still have to have a colour managed process...in fact to just display images on the net, your process needs to be colour managed...so I don't understand why you say printing forces you to be colour managed.

I have 3 printers and they plug very rarely. The prints I generate from these printers are better than what I got from a professional lab. I use these printers for everything other than metal prints. I'd never go back to using a lab where you have no idea who is making your prints.